historic name other names/site number draft · private x building(s) ... reeded casing and...

NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 (Oct. 1990) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations of eligibility for individual properties or districts. See instructions in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If an item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories listed in the instructions. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10-900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items.

1. Name of Property

historic name Cobb-Smith House

other names/site number Smith-Baldwin House

2. Location

street & number 460 South Beverwyck Road not for publication

city or town Parsippany-Troy Hills Township vicinity

state New Jersey code 034 county Morris code 027 zip code 07054

3. State/Federal Agency Certification

As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I certify that this nomination

request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property meets does not meet the National Register criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant nationally statewide locally. See continuation sheet for additional comments.

Signature of certifying official/Title Date

State or Federal agency and bureau

In my opinion, the property meets does not meet the National Register criteria. See continuation sheet for additional comments.

Signature of certifying official/Title Date

State or Federal agency and bureau

4. National Park Service Certification I hereby certify that this property is: Signature of the Keeper Date of Action

entered in the National Register. See continuation sheet.

determined eligible for the National Register. See continuation sheet.

determined not eligible for the National Register.

removed from the National Register.

other, (explain:)

DRAFT

Name of Property: Cobb-Smith House

County and State: Morris County, NJ

5. Classification Ownership of Property Category of Property Number of Resources within Property (Check as many boxes as apply) (Check only one box) (Do not include previously listed resources in the count.)

private x building(s) Contributing Noncontributing

x public-local district 1 1 buildings

public-State site sites

public-Federal structure structures object objects 1 1 Total Name of related multiple property listing (Enter "N/A" if property is not part of a multiple property listing.)

Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register

N/A 0

6. Function or Use Historic Functions (Enter categories from instructions)

Current Functions (Enter categories from instructions)

DOMESTIC/single dwelling VACANT/NOT IN USE

7. Description Architectural Classification (Enter categories from instructions)

Materials (Enter categories from instructions)

Federal foundation Ashlar stone, brick Greek Revival walls Flush wood siding Wood clapboard, aluminum siding

roof Asphalt shingle, standing seam metal other Narrative Description (Describe the historic and current condition of the property on one or more continuation sheets.)

DRAFT

Name of Property: Cobb-Smith House County and State: Morris County, NJ

8 Statement of Significance Applicable National Register Criteria Areas of Significance (Mark "x" in one or more boxes for the criteria qualifying the property for National Register listing.)

(Enter categories from instructions)

Architecture A Property is associated with events that have made

a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. B Property is associated with the lives of persons

significant in our past. x C Property embodies the distinctive characteristics

of a type, period or method of construction or Period of Significance represents the work of a master, or possesses ca. 1811-ca. 1854 high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction.

D Property has yielded, or is likely to yield, Significant Dates information important in prehistory or history. ca. 1811, ca. 1854 Criteria considerations (mark "x" in all the boxes that apply.) Property is:

Significant Person (Complete if Criterion B is marked above)

A owned by a religious institution or used for religious purposes.

B removed from its original location. Cultural Affiliation N/A C a birthplace or grave. D a cemetery. E a reconstructed building, object or structure. Architect/Builder Unknown F a commemorative property. G less than 50 years of age or achieved significance within the past 50 years.

Narrative Statement of Significance (Explain the significance of the property on one or more continuation sheets.)

9. Major Bibliographical References Bibliography (cite the books, articles, and other sources used in preparing this form on one or more continuation sheets.)

Previous documentation on file (NPS): Primary location of additional data preliminary determination of individual listing (36 State Historic Preservation Office CFR 67) has been requested Other State agency previously listed in the National Register Federal agency previously determined eligible by the National Local government Register University designated a National Historic Landmark x Other x recorded by Historic American Buildings Survey Name of repository: Parsippany Historical and

Preservation Society and the New Jersey Historical Society

# NJ-562 recorded by Historic American Engineering

DRAFT

Name of Property: Cobb-Smith House

County and State: Morris County, NJ

10. Geographical Data

Acreage of property 3.5 acres UTM References (Place additional UTM references on a continuation sheet.)

1 18 561794 4484657 3 Zone Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing

2 4

See continuation sheet

Verbal Boundary Description (Describe the boundaries of the property on a continuation sheet.)

Boundary Justification (Explain why the boundaries were selected on a continuation sheet.)

11. Form Prepared By

name/title Margaret Newman

organization date 12 May 2017 street & number PO Box 222 telephone 609.273.7003 city or town Carversville state PA zip code 18913

Additional Documentation Submit the following items with the completed form: Continuation Sheets Maps A USGS map (7.5 or 15 minute series) indicating the property's location. A Sketch map for historic districts and properties having large acreage or numerous resources.

Photographs Representative black and white photographs of the property.

Additional items (Check with the SHPO or FPO for any additional items)

Property Owner (Complete this item at the request of the SHPO or FPO.)

name Township of Parsippany-Troy Hills street & number 1001 Parsippany Blvd. telephone 973.263.4350 city or town Parsippany-Troy Hills

state NJ zip code 07054

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement: This information is being collected for applications to the National Register of Historic Places to nominate properties for listing or determine eligibility for listing, to list properties and to amend existing listings. Response to this request is required to obtain a benefit in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended (16 U.S.C.470 et seq.)

Estimated Burden Statement: Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 18.1 hours per response including time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining data and completing and reviewing the form. Direct comments regarding this burden estimate or any aspect of this from to the Chief, Administrative Services Division, National Park Service, P.O. Box 37127, Washington, DC 20013-7127; and the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reductions Projects (1024-0018), Washington, DC 20503.

DRAFT

http://ci.perthamboy.nj.us/rabies-clinic.html

http://ci.perthamboy.nj.us/rabies-clinic.html

NPS Form 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-0018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service

National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Cobb-Smith House Parsippany-Troy Hills, Morris County, NJ Section number 7 Page 1

Summary Paragraph The Cobb-Smith House is located at 460 South Beverwyck Road in Parsippany-Troy Hills, Morris County, New Jersey (Photo 1). Constructed in four primary phases—ca. 1811, 1854, ca. 1872 and ca. 1909—the house consists of three frame sections on raised stone foundations running parallel to the road facing southeast (attributed to south for ease) and a rear kitchen wing off the northwest corner on a brick foundation. The central and west sections of the house are three bays, two stories with east-west gambrel roofs and finished attics. The east section is two bays, two stories with a very low sloped roof and no attic space. There are full basements under each of these sections (Photo 2). Porches are located at the front, west, and rear entrances. The house is a contributing building to the nomination. The garage, built in the mid-20th century, is non-contributing. Setting The house stands approximately 50 feet back on the north side of South Beverwyck Road with its façade running parallel to the road. The 3.5-acre lot is fairly level along Beverwyck Road and then slopes down dramatically from the back of the house to the rear of the lot. At the front, the first floor sits approximately 34 inches above grade, but the grade drops off significantly to the rear with an exterior entrance to the basement at the kitchen wing that is only approximately 20 inches below grade. The back portion of the lot levels off and is wooded with Troy Brook running along a portion of the rear property line. Most of the property is planted with lawn accented by mature trees and shrubs. A three-bay gambrel-roof garage is situated to the west of the house and set further back from the road. The garage takes advantage of part of a historic barn foundation which is exposed on the north elevation where the grade drops away to the rear of the property. A semicircular driveway enters the property between the house and garage, bends around to a parking area in front of the garage, and exits near the southwest corner of the property. South Façade The main, or central, section is the original house, constructed ca. 1811 in the Federal style (Photo 3). Projecting beyond the flanking wings, it stands on a raised ashlar foundation with brick at the window openings. The south façade is three bays with a side-hall plan, horizontal flush tongue-and-groove siding and a gambrel asphalt roof. K-gutters hang from the plain fascia board. A Greek Revival pedimented portico sits on a stone foundation, four steps up (Photo 4). Narrow, unfluted Doric columns support a denticulated pediment on a heavy cornice. The portico complements an elegant original Federal arched reeded casing and pilasters on plinth blocks at the door adorned with an ornamental keystone over a traceried fanlight (Photo 5). The door is 6-panel, stile and rail, likely original. Added forty years later, the ornamental portico with its heavier Greek Revival dentilled cornice (Photo 6) is in contrast to the lighter, less adorned Federal architecture of the rest of this section including the plain cornice and flat window trim. Flush siding further adds to the understated elegance of this section. The first-floor windows are likely original six-over-six hung wood sash while the second floor are replacement one-over-one sash. Both have simple casings and are flanked by non-historic, non-operable aluminum shutters and have aluminum storm windows. The basement windows have exposed brick jambs having been used to square up the window opening while also providing architectural interest; they are currently covered by wood louvers. A Greek Revival west wing, added 1854, is set back approximately 4’-10” from the original house and is set on a stone foundation with brick outlining the window openings; this stone is rubble as opposed to the ashlar foundation of the center section. Its south façade has three-bays with clapboard siding, a gambrel asphalt roof and two original six-over-six hung wood sash on the first floor and three replacement one-over-one sash on the second floor. All the windows have original simple casings and are flanked by non-historic, non-operable aluminum shutters and have aluminum storm windows. Like the original center section, the basement window openings are framed with brick and covered with wood louvers. The west section originally had a side hall plan with entry at the west end. This door was removed and the opening was covered with siding.

DRAFT



The roof was raised on this section (see historic photographs Figures 1, 3, 7 and 8); this is evident above the second-floor windows where there is an awkwardly wide space below the plain fascia and hung K-gutters (Photo 2). A Greek Revival east wing, added 1854, is set back roughly the same dimension as the west wing. It covered in clapboard with a rubble stone foundation with brick at the window openings. It is a smaller two-bay section with a low-sloped gable standing-seam metal roof. There is a foundation wall in the basement separating the east from the center section, which clearly identifies this section of the house as an addition. Interestingly, there is no such wall separating the west section, leading some to believe the west section also was original. Subsequent research confirms that both flanking section are additions. The windows match the other sections with original six-over-six sash on the first floor and replacement sash on the second. All have simple casings and are flanked by non-historic, non-operable aluminum shutters and have aluminum storm windows. The east section is finished with a simple fascia board, like the other sections, with aluminum K-gutters (Photo 2). East Elevation The east elevation includes the gable end of the 1854 east wing and the eastern gambrel end of the ca. 1811 center section. Both are now covered with aluminum siding as are the cornice returns of both. The eastern foundation is rubble stone. Three windows—two on the second and the southern window on the first—are original wood, six-over-six sash with the same simple casing, aluminum shutters and storm windows. The northern window on the first floor is a smaller replacement. A late 20th century exterior concrete chimney runs along this elevation. The east elevation of the original gambrel section has four-over-four double hung wood sash at the first and second floor with two six-over-six wood sash at the third. The third-floor windows are original and retain their original sash; the first and second floor windows are original openings with replacement sash. The rear walls of both sections are aligned (Photo 7). North Elevation The rear, north elevation of the house is dominated by an enclosed porch that runs the width of the center and east sections. The porch is approximately 45’-6” across and is arranged into five equal bays with stairs and a door located at the center bay. The porch columns defining the bays are shallow with a center cut-out running from the capital down to the porch railing. The shallow dimension of the porch columns may be designed to allow the porch enclosure to run behind it, possibly indicating that the porch was originally constructed to be enclosed. The porch railing contains a crossing baluster pattern in front of the wood lower panels of the enclosure, which can be seen behind the railing. The porch is supported on brick piers which are concealed behind wood stiles with the exception of the pier at the far west end, which is exposed. Above the railing, the porch enclosure consists of sets of horizontal, four-light fixed sash panels that are interchangeable with screen panels. The porch is topped by the aluminum clad second floor and windows. At the center in the original section, there are two, twelve-over-twelve, single-hung original sash. In the western most window, at the stair hall on the interior, the upper sash has been replaced by a multi-light stained glass sash topping the twelve-light lower sash. On the east section, the second-floor windows are six-over-six. All of the windows on this elevation have aluminum storms that conceal any trim (Photo 8). Kitchen Wing The kitchen wing stands at the western end of the north elevation, constructed ca. 1872 against the rear elevation of the west wing with its ridge running north-south, perpendicular to the other roofs of the house (Photo 9). This roof too is finished with asphalt shingles and K-gutters. Unlike the other sections, the kitchen wing has a brick foundation with direct exterior access to the basement through a board-and-batten door in a shallow areaway at the west elevation, which is possible due to the drop-off in grade at the rear of the house. This wing has a mix of window types from different periods. At the basement level there are three windows: on the north elevation there is one six-over-six single-hung window with a brick arched opening to the east and

DRAFT



a six-light awning sash to the west; around the corner on the east elevation is a small six-over-three single-hung sash also within a brick arched opening. A mix of double-hung windows from different periods adorn the first floor of the kitchen wing. Two double-hung sash in the northeast corner, one at the south facing the porch and one facing the west, are associated with a mid-20th century kitchen upgrade; they are short, being located above the kitchen counter at the interior. A replacement vinyl sash in an original opening embellishes the north elevation as does a small double-hung sash opening into the powder room. This small window likely dates to mid-20th century upgrades. Two full-size windows pierce the east elevation, a six-over-six double-hung sash to the south and a twelve-over-twelve to the north. Given the later 19th century date of this wing, it is likely that the twelve-over-twelve sash was reused from another window opening (Photo 9). Enclosed stairs An external enclosed stairway runs from the kitchen wing to the second floor of the west section; the landing has a six-over-six window. Another enclosed stair connects the kitchen to the basement under the west section of the house; another six-over-six window provides light into this stair. Both of these enclosures are clad with aluminum siding and trim. Out of public view and connecting the service areas of the house, these stair enclosures, likely added ca. 1909, were clearly constructed outside the building footprint to minimize the use of interior space and isolate the service circulation from the living areas of the house (Photo 9). West Elevation The west elevation of the house consists of the west elevation of the ca. 1872 kitchen wing and the west gambrel end, all now clad with aluminum including the gambrel returns. The gambrel end has been significantly altered from its original configuration. It is now dominated by a 1-story, covered porch, a 20th century addition. The current first floor door and window patterns including the large picture window also date to the 20th century remodeling however the southern door may have been moved from the south elevation. The second-floor windows have one-over-one replacement sash while the three third floor windows date to the raising of the roof, also in the 20th century. The west elevation of the ca. 1811 original section has four-over-four sash at the south and two, original nine-over-nine sash in the upper gambrel end (Photo 10). Interior Description The main block of the house is the earliest existing section, believed to be constructed ca. 1811 (Oral histories, paint analysis and an 1854 letter indicate that this section originally had a kitchen wing that existed to the west. It may have been added later or built contemporaneously; all evidence of this earlier wing was lost with the construction of the existing western wing. See Phase II of the construction chronology at the end Section 7 for more information.) The Federal-style center section has a side-hall plan with the hall on the west side and a front and rear parlor to the east. One enters the front door directly into the stair hall (Room 101) (Photo 11). The front door is a six-panel stile-and-rail door with a bead-and-butt detail at the interior; the panels have vertical beads that butt up against the square stiles. This door is topped by a fanlight above (Photo 12). The hinges are two long strap hinges at the top and bottom rails that are almost the full width of the door. At the north end, a matching original door leads to the covered porch; this door also retains its original strap hinges. The hall runs the full depth of the house and is approximately 9’-2” wide. The floor is finished with 5” wide tongue-and-groove boards, possibly Douglas fir, that run north south and are not original to this section of the building. The walls and ceiling are painted plaster. The plaster of the walls is original, tinted with a blue wash. An original tall baseboard with cyma recta top molding runs the length of the hall. The door and window casings match throughout the hall with a shallow cyma

DRAFT



reversa center molding with a backband molding of a bead followed by deeper cyma recta (Photo 12). An original nine-over-nine sash within its original molded casing stands in the southwest corner of the west wall. The stair rises in the northwest corner up to a landing that runs the width of the hall at the rear of the hall and then turns to the front and rises another four steps up to the second-floor level. The stringer on the west wall and treads are later changes. The original bannister starts with a simple, narrow tapered square newel post (Photo 13) and continues with plain square painted balusters supporting a rounded wood handrail with clear finish. The original stair enclosure of painted, grooved, vertical wood boards is topped by a that stringer rests on a bed mold that has the same backband profile seen on the door and window casings. The landing is rectangular with intermediate newel posts at the inside corners, but the stair opening at the second-floor level is curved; this is an original Federal feature (Photo 19). At the first-floor hall, there are two mid-19th century two-over-two vertical panel stile-and rail doors within original frames. These doors sit on the east wall and lead directly to the front and rear parlors. The front and rear parlors are virtually the same size with a large square arched opening between the two rooms (Photo 14). This is a change. Originally, there was a single door, centered in the wall; scarring in the floor makes this clear. The front parlor (Room 102) is less formal than the rear, elegantly understated in its Federal detailing. These details include: random width wood board flooring which run east west, molded door and window casings with the same profile as the door casings in the hall. There is a molded chair rail with the same cyma reversa profile and a tall banded baseboard with a top profile that matches the backband profile of the door and window casings. On the south wall, the six-over-six sash with their delicate muntins appear to be original while on the east wall, the four-over-four sash within their original casing likely replaced original nine-over-nine sash like that found in the hall. The fireplace mantel, centered on the east wall, is quintessentially Federal. Its attenuated urns support triglyphs and a reeded architrave which site below the frieze with projecting pilaster caps decorated with incised vertical ovals. The projecting central panel of the frieze with a horizontal oval framed by fan-shaped gougework is an important Federal element. This is topped by an elaborate cornice with projecting planes (Photo 15). The rear parlor (Room 103) is the most formal room of the house. With the same floor, six-over-six sash and profiles at the door and windows casings and at the top of the banded baseboard, however, these are more elaborate with a taller baseboard and with window casings that extend to the floor. In addition, an original crown molding runs the full room with a ceiling adorned with decorative plaster trim with rounded three quarter hollows at the corners and at the fireplace. A diamond-shaped plaster medallion embellishes the center of the ceiling (Photo 18). Like the front parlor, the rear parlor mantel is an elegant Federal feature. Centered on the east wall, the frieze is quintessentially Federal with undulating planes all topped by a bed molding band of alternating vertical ovals and horizontal diamonds (Photo 17). The center projecting bay is adorned with a pair of arches ornamented by fan-shaped gougework which frame gougework circles; these fan-shaped motifs are also found at the front parlor frieze. The projecting center panel is flanked by recessed panels with matching, albeit larger, gougework circles. These are framed by the projecting caps of the pilasters which have inset diamonds that match the diamond medallion of the ceiling (Photos 17 and 18). These diamond-adorned caps rest on “pilasters” which are paired slender columns above three round spheres supported by stepped bases (Photo 16). These paired columns atop three spherical feet can be seen in Asher Benjamin’s 1806 The American Builder’s Companion or a New System of Architecture Particularly Adapted to the Present Style of Building in the United States of

DRAFT



America1 (Photo 17). The mantel cornice, though less elaborate than the front, has the same projections. Built-in cabinets and shelving flanking the fireplace are a 20th century addition to the room (see historic photograph Figure 6). The second-floor plan at the main block closely mirrors that of the first floor with the exception of an original small chamber at the front of the hall (Room 202). Room 201, the second-floor stair hall, has doors along the east wall which provide access to two large chambers (Rooms 203 and 204) mirroring the parlors at the first floor (Photo 19). There are two types of casing profiles in the second-floor rooms. Most match those found on the first floor with double cyma reversa moldings. The other casings have a matching backband profile but do not have the center molding. There isn’t a pattern as to where these profiles are found which may mean both types are original. In addition, all of these rooms retain their original plaster walls and ceilings, tall baseboards and floors that run north south in the hall and east west in the chambers. The six-panel wood doors with bead-and-butt detail on the interior side of the panels, similar to the front door (Photo 13), are also original. The stair hall (Room 201) has a window above the stair on the north wall. The lower sash is twelve-light, likely original, while the upper sash has multi-light stained glass banding a clear pane, this is an early 20th century addition (Photo 19). The closets off the hall on the west are a 20th century replacement of the original stair that led up to the attic in this location. Room 202, a small front chamber, has two windows both within original casings. The south sash are now one-over-one replacing what were originally twelve-over-sash. At the west, the original nine-over-nine sash remain. The front chamber (Room 203) has two windows with one-over-one sash on the south within the original casings. These were originally twelve-over-twelve. Similarly, the east four-over-four sash replaced the original nine-over-nine. This chamber retains its original Federal mantel centered on its east wall framing an enclosed firebox. It reflects the other mantels found in this section with side attenuated combed pilasters supporting a combed frieze with incised center medallion. This is topped by an elaborate projecting and receding cornice, similar to the front parlor mantel (Photo 20). The closet, with its six-panel door, appears to be original. The rear chamber (Room 204) has two windows with twelve-over-twelve sash with delicate muntins on the north wall. This chamber retains its original Federal mantel with enclosed firebox centered on its east wall. It reflects the other mantels found in this section albeit the simplest in the house. It has the same projecting and receding planes as the front room and the same attenuated pilasters but without any incising or combing. The center medallion is also plain. The closet to the south of the fireplace, with its six-panel door, appears to be original. The closet to the north provides hidden access to the east wing (Photo 21). The 1854 east wing is connected to the original house through the front parlor on the first floor and the rear chamber on the second. Oral tradition holds that this section was built as a separate “house” by parents for their married daughter and her family; this could account for the awkward connection where it is necessary to pass through rooms to get into this section. From the front parlor (Room 102), an original closet was converted to a narrow passage to connect to the main living space of the east section, Room 106 (Photo 22) and the rear hall (Room 105). Immediately behind the living room is a small modern kitchen (Room 107). Behind the kitchen and accessed from the hall is a modern bathroom (Room 108). Both of these rear rooms are a mid-20th century conversion, created following the completion of the HABS documentation in 1939, which shows this as a single space. It seems likely that when constructed, the east addition possessed two stacked rooms per floor. At the 1 Asher Benjamin, The American Builder’s Companion or a New System of Architecture Particularly Adapted to the Present Style of Building in the United States of America (Boston: Etheridge and Bliss, 1806), Plate 28.

DRAFT



northwest corner a narrow staircase rises from the rear of the building up to the front along the wall dividing the main section from the east section. The stair is surrounded by a low solid board railing at the second floor. There are three doors off the second-floor hallway (Room 205). To the south, a door opens into a front chamber (Room 206) and at the east wall a door opens into a rear chamber (Room 207). At the rear of the hall, a door on the west wall opens into the back of the added closet in the rear second floor chamber (Room 204) to connect to the original house. While this section has modern finishes including carpet, linoleum and wallpaper, many original mid-19th century Greek Revival features remain in most of the spaces. They include tall baseboards with an elongated shallow cyma reversa cap molding, four-panel doors, board and batten doors, door and window casing with the same elongated cyma reversa profile on the backband, six-over-six sash and tongue and groove stair partition. Within Room 106, stands an original Greek Revival mantel with simple pilasters with the same molding profiles as the casings and baseboards. The architrave has eared capitals. This is topped by a simple mantel shelf (Photo 23). In 1854, the west wing also was added. It connects to the hall of the Federal section (Room 101) through two doors, one into each of the west section’s stacked rooms: the parlor or living room at the front (Room 109) and a dining room at the rear (Room 110). The parlor or living room entrance is an original door opening and likely originally connected the Federal section to the earlier kitchen wing. The rear connection behind the stair dates to the 1854 construction. While altered at the beginning of the 20th century, Room 109, originally may have been a parlor or dining room. It has the most elaborate architectural details in this section, retaining significant original Greek Revival features including the shouldered door and window casings (Photo 24). These have a double band with a diagonal fillet and cyma reversa backband and are supported by plain plinth blocks. This architectural theme continues with the tall baseboard where the base is the same height as the plinth block. The cap molding consists of a diagonal sunken fillet over the same cyma reversa molding. Similarly, the window casings match with the same profile as the doors. The casings continue to the floor and are carried by the same plinth blocks. Recessed panels adorn the spaces below the two original six-over-six windows where the line of the plinth blocks and baseboard forms the bottom section of the panel’s recess (Photo 25). The fireplace mantel has simple pilasters with plain capitals holding up a shallow-arched, plain frieze topped by a minimal cornice. A Franklin Stove survives within the fireplace opening; this was added in 1878. A letter from that year from Richard Smith to his brother describes a new purchase, “I have got a nice Franklin stove in the dining room.”2 At the beginning of the 20th century, this room was enlarged by removing the original west side hall and exterior door (see historic photographs Figure 7). A small vestibule with curved wall was added to the west of the fireplace, providing access from the west porch into this room. At some point, a large picture window was added to the west wall in the location of an original window opening. The southern end of the casing retains historic finishes so appears to have been reused. The northern end of the casing was milled to match. Positioned behind Room 109, Room 110 is a slightly smaller room with a fireplace with a matching mantel to that found in Room 106 in the east section with simple pilasters over the eared architrave (Photo 26). The rest of the features of this room date to the early 20th century remodeling of this section including the china cabinet, the doors and windows and their plain block trim. 2 Richard to W.H.H. Smith letter, New Jersey Historical Society, Smith Family Papers, Manuscript Group 824, Box 84, Folder 5 (August 18, 1878).

DRAFT



Access to the second floor of the west section is gained through the stair in the original section of the house, Room 101. An opening from the west wall of the stair hall at the top of the stairs (Room 201) leads into the west hallway (Room 208) that provides access to each of the rooms in this section of the house. There is a large bedroom at the front (Room 209) In the southeast corner of the room there is a closet, through which one can enter the small room at the front of the stair hall (Room 202). In the northwest corner of this room there is a door into the rear bedroom (Room 210), which can also be reached directly off the west hall. Off the north side of the hall, there is a modern bathroom (Room 211) through which one gains access to the rear exterior stairs which lead down to the kitchen and within the house rises up to the third floor. The second floor of the west addition was heavily altered at the beginning of the 20th century when the floor and roof were both raised. The existing architectural fabric including the narrow-gauge wood floor under the existing linoleum, the wood trim, the doors and windows and the painted brick fireplace with corbeled brick mantel all date to this remodeling (Photo 27). Behind the west section is the kitchen wing, which is one story with an above grade basement. This wing of the house, constructed ca. 1872, was built strictly for domestic functions. The first floor is accessed through a door at the rear wall of the dining room (Room 110). This door opens into a large kitchen (Room 111) which was remodeled in the mid-20th century in the Colonial Revival style with its knotty pine cabinets, doors and millwork. Behind the kitchen to the north is a large laundry room in the northwest corner (Room 114), a pantry along the east wall (Room 113) and a small powder room in north east corner accessed from the laundry room (Room 115). Paint analysis confirms that 19th century fabric remains in the laundry room (Room 114) including the rear window frame, beaded board wainscoting, beaded board basement stair enclosure and four-panel door. The enclosed stair of the laundry room (Room 114) provides access to a basement storage room (Room 009) that is finished with plaster and has shelving running the length of both the east and west walls. This room is confined to the northeast corner of this addition. The rest of the basement in this section is accessed from an exterior door on the west elevation. As the primary use for this space is access to the cistern, it is very rudimentary. The vaulted cistern stands against the north wall of the west addition. There is only one pipe visible at the interior of the cistern, which appears to be a horizontal drain pipe at the northeast corner of the structure. It is not clear how the cistern was filled or how water was pumped from the cistern to the house. Each of the three sections of the house have full basements. The original section, like the first floor, is divided into a hall (Room 001) with two stacked rooms to the east (Rooms 002 and 003). The south and east walls are stone while the north and west walls are heavy oak slats. The hall and front rooms have dirt floors while the rear room has a finished wood floor. The west section is made up of three rooms, the larger front room (Room 005) and rear room (Room 007) with a smaller enclosed room carved out of the front (Room 006). When this section was added in the mid-19th century, the rear room was the kitchen: wood floors and wainscot remain as does a later 19th century cookstove and the remains of a beehive oven (Photo 28). It is presumed that the plastered-walled small room off the kitchen (Room 006) was used as a pantry. The east addition contains one large room (Room 004) with a dirt floor and whitewashed stone walls. Remnants of a board partition and the original open stair remain in the northwest corner of this room. An attic tops the west and original sections of the house; it contains six rooms. The rooms over the original section of the house (Rooms 302-306) were added in mid-19th century when the additions were constructed (Photo 29). The eastern rooms of the west section (Rooms 301 and 307-309) date to the early 20th century remodeling when the roof of this west addition was raised, creating this space.

DRAFT



Construction Chronology of the Cobb-Smith House Historically, there has been disagreement as to the date of construction of the original central section of the Cobb-Smith House. According to the Historic American Building Survey (HABS), the Cobb-Smith House was built at the end of the 18th century by Dr. Joseph Parrett. A local historian, Kenneth L. Purzycki, disagreed and asserted in his report that Calvin Cook built the original section in 1819. However, with the discovery of new information through additional research, it is clear that the extant earliest section of the house was built by John Joline Cobb ca. 1811. In addition to the questions about when the house was built, there has been a dispute about whether the west section of the house is an addition or was constructed at the same time as the center section as a service wing. There is no foundation wall between these two sections and no indication of dismantled masonry; the visible corners are cleanly constructed. Recent archival research has revealed that there was an earlier wing to the west of the center section. This could have been the earliest section of the house or it may have been built contemporaneously. In 1854, this wing was torn down and replaced with the existing west wing which over the years was altered and expanded. See Phase II for more information. PHASE I Federal style original construction for John Joline and Jane Cobb, ca. 1811 At the end of the 18th century, with the death of Samuel and Archibald Parrett, Dr. Joseph Parrett came into the possession of 500 hundred acres that were a combination of 200 acres accumulated by his father Samuel Parrett, 200 acres inherited by his mother Eleanor Ailing Parrett from her parents and roughly 100 accumulated by Dr. Parrett himself. At this time, the 500 acres neighbored and were becoming the village of Troy. With the unexpected death of Dr. Joseph Parrett who died intestate in 1801, this land was divided into four parts and given to Parrett’s sisters: Elizabeth, Ann, Eleanor and Charity. This was completed in 1804.3 The tract that is now the Cobb-Smith property was a part of an 89.42-acre tract given to Ann Parrett Cobb in the 1804 deed dividing her brother Dr. Parrett’s property. Soon after this official division, John Cobb, Esq. the husband of Ann, died (December 7, 18054) and divided his property between his two sons, Henry and John Joline Cobb. It appears that he died intestate as no will was uncovered; his inventory indicates a wealthy man, including owning five slaves.5 In 1809, Henry and John Joline Cobb legally divided their father’s property in three separate deeds. In the first, dated 22 December 1809, Henry and his wife Maria, gave John Joline Cobb six tracts of land which included two sections of woods. The first lot, containing 29.65 acres, is the location of the house today. The second deed secured a property for their sister. The final deed from December 22, 1809 listed where John Cobb was living in 1809, “…from the dwelling house wherein said Henry and John J. Cobb now lives on the north side of the lane leading to the forge…”6 This deed is important because it confirms that the Cobb-Smith House had not yet been constructed; Henry and John Joline Cobb were both living in the Cobb family homestead in 1809. On July 11, 1811, John Joline Cobb married Jane Jacobus and it is following this marriage, that it appears the original section of the Cobb-Smith House was constructed. While this date is unlikely to ever be known definitively, there are several reasons

3 Morris County Map Book L, page 1 4 John Cobb grave, http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GSln=Cobb&GSfn=John&GSby=1750&GSbyrel=in&GSdyrel=all&GSob=n&GRid=7121832&df=all& 5 Morris County Inventory 1266N (1806) 6 Morris County Deed Book T, page 218

DRAFT



for this proposed date which contradicts the two previous studies of the house: the HABS documentation as well as Parsippany Historical and Preservation Society historian, Kenneth L. Purzycki’s report. According to the HABS documentation, the original section of the house was built between 1788 and 1801 when it was under the ownership of Dr. Joseph Parrett. One piece of evidence appears to preclude the house’s existence prior to 1798. In that year, Hanover Township completed an assessment of all of the properties that exceeded $100 in value as part of the Federal Direct Tax. Among other information, this assessment provided the dimensions of each “dwelling house” as well as the construction materials, the number of stories and the number of windows. In 1798, Joseph Parrett was taxed for a 32 ft. x 32 ft., two-story, wood house with eleven windows. The value of his dwelling house and accompanying lot was $500. Samuel Parrett, Joseph’s father whose property Joseph inherited, had a 28 ft. x 28 ft., one story, wood house with five windows valued at $250. The original section of the Cobb-Smith House is 28.5 ft. x 34 ft., two-stories, wood and may have had as many as 16 windows (it is unclear how the windows were counted but it doesn’t appear that any garret windows were included). From this, it seems clear that the Parrett family did not own the Cobb-Smith House. In fact, from a review of the list, published in full in 1975 by Harriet Stryker-Rodda in her book, Some Early Records of Morris County, New Jersey 1740-1799, it does not seem as though a two-story, wood building with the dimensions of the Cobb-Smith existed anywhere in the Township. If the dimensions were similar (27-30 ft. x 32-35 ft. or reversed 32-35 ft. x 27-30 ft. as it is unclear which elevation was measured first), the number of stories was one or the building was made out of stone. Similarly, looking at the dimensions of both sections of the house, in case they were in fact built at the same time, there is no two-story wood houses with the dimensions 50 ft. x 34 ft. Because of this, it does not appear the Cobb-Smith House existed in 1798. John Cobb, who inherited the property following Parrett’s death in 1804 was taxed for a 31 ft. x 31 ft., two-story wood house with sixteen windows, valued at $500 in 1798.7 While it is possible that Parrett built his house following the 1798 assessment but before his death in 1801, additional evidence points to a later construction date for the Cobb-Smith House. First, from the 1798 ratables, it is clear that John and Ann Cobb owned a nice house valued at $500. While there were four houses within the Township valued at over $1,000 and two at $2,000, the vast majority of the houses were valued in the $100-$300 range. In 1804, when the Cobbs inherited Parrett’s land, John was 54 and Ann was 48. It doesn’t seem likely that at that age they would leave the comfort of their nice house to move into Dr. Parrett’s house, which was roughly the same size and valued at the same price. In fact, John Cobb ended up dying at the end of the following year, on December 17, 1805, making it even less likely that they would have moved. While unlikely, it still could be possible that Parrett built the house. However, if he did, why wouldn’t one of Cobb’s sons have moved into this house rather than staying in their parents’ house? By 1804, Henry was 26 and John Joline was 20. The fact that neither did is confirmed by analysis of the Hanover Township Tax Ratables from the first decade of the 1800. In 1805, the last year of John Cobb’s life, he was taxed for 481 acres of land, a forge, a chair and a slave. Henry Cobb was also listed, as a single man without land but owning two horses. John Joline Cobb was not listed at all. In 1806, Henry Cobb was taxed for his father’s land while John Joline was taxed for the forge, livestock and the chair. John Joline was taxed for 205 acres of unimproved land in 1807 (and 1809, although this copy is very difficult to read). The 1809 deeds seem to indicate that the property John Joline was given was land only. The third deed confirmed John Joline was still living at home with his brother Henry, in his parents’ house by the forge. In 1810, John Joline was taxed for 150 acres of improved land and 81 acres of unimproved.8 On July 11, 1811, John Joline Cobb married Jane Jacobus and it is following this marriage, a year after improving his land, that it appears the John Joline and Jane Jacobus built the original section of the house. 7 Harriet Stryker-Rodda, Some Early Records of Morris County, New Jersey 1740-1799 (New Orleans: Polyanthos, 1975), 175-183. 8 NJ Tax Lists 1772-1822. Hanover Township, Morris County (1810)

DRAFT



Architecturally, the existing original fabric of the center section is in keeping with a second decade of the 19th century date of construction during the Federal period. Important surviving original exterior elements that are Federal in style include the flush siding, the traceried fanlight and the ornate door surround with ornamental keystone. The mantels throughout this section but especially in the parlors, and the ornamental plaster ceiling in the rear parlor attest to the Federal period of construction as do the features of the front hall including the trim work, the tinted plaster and the simple elegance of the stair with its curve at the top and square balusters. This date of construction is further corroborated in a general way by the Smith Family Papers at the New Jersey Historical Society. They reveal that Mary L. Smith, daughter of Mary and Hiram Smith, Jr., confirmed that John J. Cobb had the house built that her parents bought in 1833.9 Phase II Greek Revival wings by Hiram and Mary Smith, 1854 In 1833, when Hiram Smith, Jr. and his wife Mary purchased the property, the house would have consisted of a full basement, side hall and double parlor on the first floor, three bedrooms on the second floor and an unfinished garret. The staircases all ran against the west wall of the hall, stacked on top of each other: the basement stairs were under the existing stair to the second floor where a closet now exists and the enclosed stairs to the garret were to the south of the grand staircase. The garret was unfinished. The kitchen was located in a separate wing on the west side of the house. It may have been attached to the house or could have been a distinct building. According to the Smith Family, this wing was built before the Revolutionary War. If this is true, it is unclear who built it.10 On January 30, 1854, Mary Smith wrote a letter to her daughter Eleanor describing “the inconvenience we have suffered from want of bedrooms and as our children increase in size and our big ones come home…we find the cramped accommodations increasingly uncomfortable and have considered that the time to build has come.” Mary went on to detail the addition the family planned to build, “John Baldwin is the builder and I am the architect…We propose to move the kitchen 19 ft. nearer the barn and erect a building 19 ft. front adjoining the large house of the same depth/30 ft. and height to be finished in the same style as the old one with a piazza on the back side across the whole.”11 This very thorough letter went on to discuss the size and uses of the rooms on each floor throughout the house. Among other details she provided, she planned to reverse the existing stairs to the third story and include dormers at the front and back. This letter is significant for several reasons. First, it confirms that the original kitchen for the house was an auxiliary wing and may have been a separate building. This is important because there was supposition that the basement kitchen could have been an original feature of the house. Second, it clarifies that no addition was constructed prior to 1854. Because the Smiths were a large family when they bought the house, it was believed that they immediately built a wing to accommodate their five children and extended family who lived with them. This letter proves that they waited almost 20 years before adding. Third, it clarifies that the west wing is being discussed. The barns existed to the west of the house. The kitchen wing had to be moved closer to the barns to make room for the construction of a new wing. If her addition was proposed for the east, the kitchen wing would not have needed to be moved.

9 Philip Henry Waddell Smith, notes, New Jersey Historical Society, Smith Family Papers, Manuscript Group 824, Box 126, Folder 10; Mary L. Smith, “The Hiram Smith Homestead, Troy N.J. 1833-1925,” New Jersey Historical Society, Smith Family Papers, Manuscript Group 824, Box 126, Folder 6. 10 Ibid. 11 Mary Smith letter to Eleanor Doty, New Jersey Historical Society, Smith Family Papers, Manuscript Group 824, Box 84, Folder 1847-1854 (January 30, 1854).

DRAFT



Unfortunately, what Mary Smith proposed in the letter was not built and it is unclear why. The Smith Family collection from the New Jersey Historical Society is vast, 135 boxes and 60 linear feet. While this collection is mostly catalogued, there is a lot of information within hundreds of folders; it is possible, therefore, that another letter, which followed the January 1854 letter, exists and is buried in a folder. However, as no such letter was found, we can only suppose why the plans changed. First, the kitchen is important. From Mary’s letter, it is clear the kitchen was originally a separate wing. Oral history from Mary L. Smith, Mary and Hiram’s daughter, extend our information about the wing. According to the family, it was a pre-Revolutionary structure that was at least 1 ½ stories as there were sleeping quarters above. From Mary’s description, we know that the separate kitchen was the sphere of the slaves. This was a common 18th century arrangement. According to Michael Olmert in “Kitchens: Places Apart” in Williamsburg, the earliest kitchens were basement kitchens incorporated in the main block of the house. By the second quarter of the 18th century, however, this trend changed and the kitchens began to be built as separate buildings that included lodging for slaves, “The new kitchen architecture suddenly had little to do with cooking and everything to do with race, gender and social space.”12 In other words, it was important to separate the heat, smells and slavery from the white realm of the main house. In 1854, when the Smiths decided to renovate their house, the racial need for separation was no longer in play. With the exception of “Old Jack” whom Mary discussed in her letter, the Smiths may not have had any black members of their household staff; by 1850, they had been replaced by whites and white immigrants. (important note, there are no blacks listed in the 1850 census while and in her 1854 letter, Mary talked about “Old Jack” so it is unclear how many former slaves the Smiths may have had living with them when the additions were made; in 1840, there were 3 “free colored people” living in the house.) While it was desirable to have a kitchen that was separate enough from the main living areas to keep away the heat and smells, it was no longer necessary for the kitchens (and races) to be physically separate. It would appear, therefore, that in 1854 rather than expend the energy to move and renovate the 50-year-plus kitchen wing, the decision was made to put the new kitchen in the basement. Mary discussed the difficulty of taking down and rebuilding the kitchen chimney in her letter. In the end, the Smiths decided against it. While it would seem surprising that in 1854, the Smiths would choose to put a kitchen in the basement, as this is thought of as more of an 18th century design solution,13 it appears to have happened and there are other examples of contemporaneous designs. In 1856, for example, Edward Shaw espoused a basement kitchen for the Grecian Doric plan in The Modern Architect, Or, Every Carpenter His Own Master: Embracing Plans, Elevations, Framing, Etc. for Private Houses, Classic Dwellings, Churches &c. “The kitchen and store-room, in the basement story, sheathed up with boards from five to six inches wide, four feet from the floor.”14 Like the kitchen in the Cobb-Smith House, Shaw recommended wainscot for the perimeter walls. Another important thing to note of this 1854 kitchen is the possible combination of cook stove and built-in brick bake oven. In the 1850s, cook stoves remained new inventions and were often seen as difficult to use. For this reason, many households compromised, embracing both the new technology of the stove and continuing to employ the 18th century brick

12 Michael Olmert, “Kitchens: Places Apart” CW Journal (Summer 2007) http://www.history.org/foundation/journal/summer07/kitchens.cfm 13 Mark E. Reinberger and Elizabeth McLean, The Philadelphia Country House: Architecture and Landscape in Colonial America (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2015), 168-69. 14 Edward Shaw, The Modern Architect, Or, Every Carpenter His Own Master: Embracing Plans, Elevations, Framing, Etc. for Private Houses, Classic Dwellings, Churches &c. (Boston: Wentworth and Company, 1856), 76.

DRAFT



oven technology.15 The existing stove in the house, the Richardson Boynton & Company “American Kitchener,” dates to 1860 making it at least the second generation of stove in this kitchen.16 An 1862 letter between Richard and his brother discussed moving “the old oven in the kitchen” into the adjoining closet.17 Although there is a possibility that the fireplace was an open hearth originally; it was altered with a cast iron insert for the current stove presumably installed in 1862. The other important thing about Mary’s 1854 letter about her proposed design is the reason she gave for wanting the new addition: more bedrooms. If additional bedroom space was the driving factor for building, why would she construct a two-story addition which provided only two new bedrooms (when built, the west wing was only two stories see historic photographs) instead of the planned on three stories which provided four? Because of this need for bedrooms, one possibility is that instead of building a three-story addition, the Smiths decided to build both wings at the same time. This provided the four bedrooms that were desired as well as providing additional living spaces on the ground floor. Several things support this theory. First, when constructed, these wings were architecturally similar: the same height, massing and flat roof line. This balanced design could have been an intentional tripartite form espoused by the Greek Revival builders’ manual written by Minaver Lafever in 1833; these were being built all over the United States at this time.18 Second, paint analysis seems to confirm that the east and west wings were built roughly at the same time. While there are very few exterior features remaining on the west wing from its original construction (this wing was heavily altered at the beginning of the 20th century), those that do remain, like the exterior door surround on the west elevation, have roughly the same number of layers of paint as the original features of the east wing. Third, there are identical fireplace mantles on the ground floor of both wings. If they had not been built at the same time, why would they match? Fourth, the floor framing is the same in both sections. The dimensions of the joists (2 ½” x 9” sawn), their spacing (18” on center) as well as their general configuration with a summer beam in the same location is identical. Interestingly, in the west wing at the kitchen, this summer beam is located just south of the masonry of the bake oven. Fifth, the foundations of the two wings are identical with the same stone and brick at the windows. Finally, Mary Smith described a piazza that ran across the rear of the building. While the existing fabric of the rear porch seems to be from the 20th century, additional analysis may prove that its structure is from the 19th century and is a part of the original design. The other thing that is important about Mary’s 1854 letter that further proves that the wings were built at the same time is the fact that at the end of her description of the proposed design she stated, “I will engage a drawing of the plan that will enable you to understand more clearly how [it] will look.”19 A drawing of the house survives in the Parsippany Historical and Preservation Society Archives. According to family tradition, it dates to 1855-56 and was sent to Eleanor in China to show her the new house. In this drawing, both wings exist (Figure 1). Eleanor died in 1858, which means that between 1854 and 1858,

15 Priscilla J. Brewer, From Fireplace to Cookstove: Technology and the Domestic Ideal in America (Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 2000), 135-150. 16 G.E. Currie, Ed. The United States Insurance Gazette and Magazine, Volume XII, October 1860 (New York: Gilbert E. Currie, 1861), https://books.google.com/books?id=1l5HAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA626&dq=american+sand-oven+kitchener&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjKgdff2IvLAhWGn4MKHRPGDjIQ6AEINTAA#v=onepage&q=american%20sand-oven%20kitchener&f=false 17 Letter from Richard Smith to his brother, “Henry” Smith Family 824, Box 79, Folder 13 “W.H.H. Smith: Letters received.” (9 March 1862). 18 Daniel D. Reiff, Houses from Books Treatises, Pattern Books, and Catalogs in American Architecture, 1738-1950: A History and Guide (University Park, PA: the Pennsylvania State University Press, 2000), 54-57. 19 Mary Smith letter to Eleanor Doty (January 30, 1854).

DRAFT



both wings were built. According to family lore, the east wing was completed by 1855 and constructed in preparation for the return of Eleanor Doty from a missionary trip in China. She was to live with her parents with her growing family and the addition—connected to but still separate from the main block—was to be her home. This seems further confirmation that they were built simultaneously. Phase III Kitchen Addition by Richard Smith, ca. 1872 At some point, the kitchen was moved out of the basement and a one-story frame kitchen wing was constructed to the rear of the house; this wing remains extant today. An 1865 inventory confirms this was completed after Hiram Smith’s death; presumably, it was built under the tenure of Richard Smith who died in 1891. It seems more likely to have occurred soon after his mother’s death, in 1872. The fireplace and fireplace base confirm a 19th century date of construction for the wing (even if the fireplace was only to vent a stove) as does paint analysis, which indicates the surviving paint, is chemically more 19th century than 20th. This is corroborated by family oral history, which states that Richard built this wing. In addition, during Richard’s tenure, a one-story frame wing was added to the west. This may have been a store or office that was used in conjunction with milk sales. Beyond an undated photo (see figure 3), there is no information about this wing and all evidence of it has been lost with its demolition and subsequent porch and kitchen addition in its location. Archaeological investigations may reveal information about this wing. Phase IV William and Marjorie Smith Baldwin, ca. 1909 Richard’s wife, Emily Smith died in 1904 and through her husband’s will, the house went to their children: Emily Smith and Marjorie Baldwin. In 1909, Emily deeded her half of the house to Marjorie; although not an owner, the 1920 census shows that she continued to live there (although she is not listed there in 1910). Once she became the full owner of the house, it is assumed that Marjorie and her husband William Baldwin made changes to the house. Before Emily Smith died, she and her daughter, Emily, a schoolteacher, ran a summer school in the house. A brochure dating to before 1904 survives advertising this school (Figure 8). With the exception of a 1916 class photo, no other information could be found about this school. Online searches in books and magazines and indexed newspaper searches found nothing. There is also no reference in any of the census records (1900-1920) indicating that the house was used as a school or that Emily Smith was a teacher. Through the scant evidence that remains, however, one can presume that the changes made to the house, which made it bigger at a time when the family and staff were both shrinking, were made to accommodate the school and schoolchildren with larger public spaces, a large porch and more space in the garret for sleeping students. Ca. 1909, the Baldwins made the following changes:

• The addition of the porch across the back of the house (although it is possible that this is a remodel of an 1854 piazza) • The construction of the porch on the west elevation • The removal of the exterior door of the south elevation of the west section • With the removal of the exterior door, the side hall was removed on the interior and Room 109 was enlarged. It is

likely that the curved wall was added at this time to make an enclosed entrance from the west porch. Paint analysis

DRAFT



indicates that the south exterior door may have been moved to the west elevation and reused. The large picture window on the west wall was added at some point. It is extant by the HABS documentation in 1939 although 1909 seems too early for this change.

• The second floor of the west section was raised. All trim on the second floor dates to this 1909 period • The original almost flat roof of the west section was made into the gambrel roof seen today, providing more usable

space in the garret • The removal of the stairs to the garret in the original section of the house and the construction of the stairs to the new

garret of the west section.

Phase IVa The HABS documentation shows that minor changes were made to the house after 1939. For instance, the closets in the second-floor hall of the main center section do not exist in the HABS drawings. Similarly, modern finishes were added, as were additional bathrooms after 1939.20

20 Historic American Building Survey, “Parritt, Dr. Joseph House,” HABS NJ-562. https://www.loc.gov/item/nj0709/

DRAFT



Statement of Significance Summary Paragraph The Cobb-Smith House is locally significant under Criterion C as an example of Federal and Greek Revival architecture. First constructed ca. 1811 in the Federal style, the original three-bay, two-story house with side hall plan was elegantly refined in the Federal style with its dressed stone foundation, flush-board façade siding, delicately arched molded door casing with reeded pilasters atop plinth blocks centered with an ornamental keystone over the traceried fanlight. This understated sophistication continued on the interior with tinted plaster walls, fireplace mantels with attenuated urns, ovals and gougework, molded door and window trim, refined plaster ceiling ornamentation and an open and curving stair. The house changed hands and in 1854, two flanking wings were added to the original house. In the Greek Revival style, these wings have clapboard siding, plain casings and cornices atop rubble stone foundations. On the interior, the woodwork is classically Greek Revival including the heavily shouldered door and window casings with a triple banded profile supported by plain plinth blocks, molded window panels and wood fireplace mantels with shouldered architraves. Short History of Parsippany-Troy Hills, Morris County European settlers arrived in the Parsippany-Troy Hills area of Hanover Township in the early 18th century, drawn there for the high quality of its land and its iron ore and timber. By the mid-18th century, there were several forges including one in Troy. Early Troy families included the Cobbs, Baldwins, Condits, Smiths, Parretts and Howells. They were generally of English descent and largely Presbyterian. George Washington was a frequent visitor to Troy staying at the Von Beverhoudt’s Beverwyck Mansion on Beverwyck Road, then known as Washington’s Trail because it was situated along a road that connected two of his important headquarters: Morristown and West Point. Troy began as an industrial village of forge and mills and evolved into an agricultural crossroads community through the 19th century. Early field crops concentrated on grain including wheat, oats and corn and livestock included horses, milk cows and cattle. Farming evolved over the 19th century with less focus on grain crops and more emphasis on dairying and other more specialized farming. While following World War I suburban development began in Hanover Township, Troy remained largely undeveloped, dominated by farms with many dairy farms. In 1928, the Township of Parsippany-Troy Hills separated from Hanover Township, becoming its own municipality. Between 1930 and 1940, the population of the Township increased by 65% with most of the development occurring in Parsippany. Suburban development arrived in Troy in the 1960s. The population of the Township exploded between 1960 and 1970, increasing by 115% with development in Troy contributing to this increase. Today, Parsippany-Troy Hills is a commuter suburb of New York as well as a hub of corporations while the historic village of Troy remains today as a residential district with 19th and early 20th century houses.1 The Cobb-Smith House: The Cobb Family and Tenure, 1809-1819 John Cobb, the progenitor of the Cobb family in Troy (born December 17, 1723 in Taunton, Massachusetts) married Rhoda Smith of Parsippany in 1747 in Massachusetts. In the early 1750s, they moved to Troy to begin operating an existing forge with partner Thomas Brown.2 Their son, John Cobb, Esq. was born November 24, 1750; in 1753, he was baptized at the Presbyterian Church of Hanover along with three of his siblings. On October 31, 1773, John Cobb, Esq. married Ann Parrett (sometimes Parritt) (born March 30, 1756 in Troy) the daughter of Samuel and Eleanor Ailing (sometimes Alling) Parrett. The Parretts also were long-established in Troy and were large land holders. Among other prominent local positions, John Cobb, 1 Parsippany Historical and Preservation Society, Images of America: Parsippany-Troy Hills (Dover, New Hampshire: Arcadia Publishing, 1997), 1-3.; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsippany-Troy_Hills,_New_Jersey#Census_2000 2 http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~cobb/morgan.html

DRAFT



Esq. served as Sheriff and Justice of the Peace; he was also wealthy, owning 5 slaves at the time of his death. On May 23, 1778, their son, John Joline Cobb was born in Troy.3 In 1804, the 500-acre estate of Dr. Joseph Parrett (he died intestate in 1801) was divided between his four sisters, among them Ann Parrett Cobb. With the earlier death of Ann Parrett Cobb followed in 1805 by her husband, John Cobb, Esq., his estate including the land she inherited from her brother was divided among his children who through several transactions finalized their holdings. This included a 29.65-acre tract where John Joline Cobb built the original section of the house.4 The third generation of the Cobb family to live in Troy, John J. Cobb was a physician and a graduate of the College of New Jersey. On July 11, 1811, he married Jane Jacobus; it is believed he had the house constructed ca. 1811. John J. Cobb and his wife Jane had four children while living in the house: Ann (born 1812), Henrietta (born 1814), William (born 1816) and Abraham (born 1819). 5 During his ownership of the house, John Cobb owned both a slave and a “chair” (a single axle carriage); this attests to his wealth.6 However, by 1819, he may have had financial troubles. According to family lore, he had to borrow money from Calvin Cook, a local usurer, to build the house and then in 1819, he lost the house to Cook because of unpaid debt.7 No corroborating record was found of this transaction. John J. Cobb died in Somerset County, New Jersey in 1846.8 Several things point to construction of the original section of the house for John and Jane Cobb. According to Mary L. Smith, who is the source of much of the Smith family oral history (she was the daughter of Hiram and Mary Smith, born in 1843 and died in 1939 at the age of 96), John J. Cobb built the house that her parents bought in 1833.9 Second, John Joline Cobb was taxed for improved land for the first time in 1810.10 Finally, the Federal style of the original section—including the flush siding, decorative arched surround and traceried fanlight, tinted stair hall plaster, fireplace mantels and decorative molded plaster—was at its height of popularity, and thus solidifies a ca. 1811 date of construction. John Cobb was from an important and wealthy local family. While he may have eventually lost the house, the choices of the Federal style places John and Jane Cobb firmly in the mercantile class at the time the house was constructed. The post-Revolutionary War Federal style was “the favored mode of the Federal aristocracy on the eastern seaboard.”11 The Cobb-Smith House: Calvin Cook and Lewis and Susan H. Davenport, 1819-1833 In 1819, Calvin Cook acquired 29.65 acres from John Joline Cobb for $3,750.12 According to the Smith family, Cook was a local usurer and very miserly. He originally lent the money to Cobb for the construction of the house and Cobb, unable to 3 http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~njmorris/biographies/rockawayrecords/cobb.htm; http://mv.ancestry.com/viewer/914a25ea-8de6-4677-a616-4c1928d15773/7005889/6888640231 4 Morris County Map Book L, page 1; Morris County Inventory 1266N (1806) 5 J. Percy Crayon, Rockaway Records of Morris County, New Jersey Families (Rockaway: Rockaway Publishing Co., 1902), 279 http://mv.ancestry.com/viewer/914a25ea-8de6-4677-a616-4c1928d15773/7005889/6888640231. 6 NJ Tax Lists 1772-1822. Hanover Township, Morris County (1812-1817) 7 Philip Henry Waddell Smith, notes, New Jersey Historical Society, Smith Family Papers, Manuscript Group 824, Box 126, Folder 10. 8 http://forums.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=7122178 9 Waddell Smith notes; Mary L. Smith, “The Hiram Smith Homestead, Troy N.J. 1833-1925,” New Jersey Historical Society, Smith Family Papers, Manuscript Group 824, Box 126, Folder 6. 10 NJ Tax Lists 1772-1822. Hanover Township, Morris County (1810) 11 William H. Pierson, American Buildings and Their Architects: The Colonial and Neoclassical Style (New York: Oxford University Press, 1970), 215.

DRAFT

http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/%7Enjmorris/biographies/rockawayrecords/cobb.htm

http://mv.ancestry.com/viewer/914a25ea-8de6-4677-a616-4c1928d15773/7005889/6888640231



make payments on his loan, had to forfeit the house back to Cook.13 Beyond this information, little is known about Cook aside from his being a local landowner who began to be taxed in Hanover Township in 1805 and was taxed through at least 1818.14 Cook owned the property until 1831 when he sold 10+ acres to Lewis E. Davenport for $1 including the “house lot.” By this time, Cook was living in New York, as was Davenport.15 According to the Smith Family, Lewis Davenport was Cook’s son-in-law, having married his daughter.16 Two things confirm this familial connection. The sale price of $1 for the property usually indicates a connection between buyer and seller. In addition, probate records were found that were filed in New York by Lewis E. Davenport on June 10, 1845 for the estate of Calvin Cook who died intestate at the home of Henry Cob of Bergen County (no relation to the Troy Cobbs) without any surviving family or heirs.17 The Cobb-Smith House: The Smith Family, 1833-2013 In 1833, Lewis Davenport and his wife Susan sold 10.5 acres to Hiram Smith Jr. for $2,040. Having owned the property for only two years, it is possible that the Davenports never lived there although according to the 1833 deed both parties were living in Hanover Township.18 According to Mary L. Smith, prior to buying their own house, Hiram and his wife were living with Hiram’s father, Colonel Hiram Smith. Upon his son’s departure, Colonel Smith followed his son to his new house, uninvited, leaving his own homestead.19 Colonel Hiram Smith was a local hero who served as a sergeant with the Third Regiment of Jersey Line, Continental Army, eventually becoming a colonel in the peace time militia during the decades following the Revolution. Following the Revolutionary War, he was a prominent political figure in Hanover Township. He served as a justice of the peace from 1788-1793, a member of the New Jersey Assembly 1791-92, the Morris County sheriff from 1794-96, and the Morris County judge from 1800-05. Hiram Smith married Eleanor Parrett, a descendant of two prominent local families. Colonel Smith died April 27, 1833 at the Cobb-Smith House, three months after moving there.20 Hiram Smith, Jr. was the 8th child of Colonel Smith and Eleanor Parrett; he was born August 15, 1799 in Troy. On September 9, 1822, he married Mary Allen Osborn (born April 25, 1802 in Parsippany).21 Osborn was educated at the Moravian Seminary for Girls in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. They were married on September 9, 1822. Hiram Smith, Jr. was a prominent local

12 Morris County Deed Book HH, page 492 13 Waddell Smith notes 14 NJ Tax Lists 1772-1822. Hanover Township, Morris County (1805-1818) 15 Morris County Deed Book A3, page 76 16 Smith notes, Box 126, Folder 10. 17 http://interactive.ancestry.com/8800/005522066_00466?pid=5215459&backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.com%2f%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fgss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dCalvin%26gsfn_x%3d0%26gsln%3dCook%26gsln_x%3d0%26mswpn__ftp%3dNew%2bYork%2bCity%2b(All%2bBoroughs)%252c%2bNew%2bYork%252c%2bUSA%26mswpn%3d1652382%26mswpn_PInfo%3d6-%257c0%257c1652393%257c0%257c2%257c3244%257c35%257c1652382%257c0%257c0%257c0%257c%26MSAV%3d1%26msrdy %3d1830%26msrpn__ftp%3dNew%2bYork%2bCity%2b(All%2bBoroughs)%252c%2bNew%2bYork%252c%2bUSA%26cp%3d0%26catbucket%3drstp%26pcat%3dROOT_CATEGORY%26h%3d5215459%26db%3dUSProbateNY%26indiv%3d1%26ml_rpos%3d35&treeid=&personid=&hintid=&usePUB=true#?imageId=005522066_00468 18 Morris County Deed Book D3, page 140 19 Mary L. Smith letter to her nieces and nephews, New Jersey Historical Society, Smith Family Papers, Manuscript Group 824, Box 126, Folder 10 (April 6, 1930). 20 http://www.geni.com/people/Lt-Col-Hiram-Smith/6000000017615755382 21 John W. Jordan, Colonial and Revolutionary Families of Pennsylvania Volume II (New York: The Lewis Publishing Company, 1911), 791.

DRAFT

http://interactive.ancestry.com/8800/005522066_00466?pid=5215459&backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.com%2f%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fgss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dCalvin%26gsfn_x%3d0%26gsln%3dCook%26gsln_x%3d0%26mswpn__ftp%3dNew%2bYork%2bCity%2b(All%2bBoroughs)%252c%2bNew%2bYork%252c%2bUSA%26mswpn%3d1652382%26mswpn_PInfo%3d6-%257c0%257c1652393%257c0%257c2%257c3244%257c35%257c1652382%257c0%257c0%257c0%257c%26MSAV%3d1%26msrdy







man. In addition to running his farm and estate, he ran a “business in transporting to and distributing in New York City the various dairy products of his own and adjoining communities of Morris county [sic], New Jersey…”22 By 1833, when they purchased the property, Hiram and Mary Allen Osborn Smith had been married for 11 years and had five children. When the family acquired the property, the main block of the house existed (having been built by John J. Cobb) as did an auxiliary kitchen wing which was near to or adjacent to the house. According to Mary L. Smith, this wing was pre-Revolutionary; if this is true, it is unclear who built it. The kitchen was further described by Philip Henry Waddell Smith, the grandson of Mary and Hiram Smith, from oral accounts of his aunt, Mary L. Smith: the kitchen wing was 1 ½ stories with one large room on the first floor and bedrooms on the upper. This wing was occupied by the “kitchen family,” the Smith’s slaves and later free blacks.23 By 1840, there were 14 people living in the Hiram Smith House: 11 whites and 3 free blacks.24 This number was reduced to 12 by 1850 when the household included Hiram and Mary, 4 sons, 2 daughters, Hiram’s sister Adriana (known as Aunt Addie), a farm laborer Michael Croney, and two female servants (24-year-old Catharine Croney and 9-year-old Hennetta Frazier). Hiram and his two older sons were listed as farmers.25 The January 30, 1854 letter from Mary Smith to her daughter Eleanor Doty as well as the architectural evidence in the house indicate that the Smiths had their additions constructed in 1854. By 1860, with the additions constructed, there were 18 people living in the Hiram Smith House. Hiram and Mary and three of their children were joined in the house by Reverend Doty and his four children. Aunt Addie continued to live with the family. The household included seven staff members: three male laborers, two male farm laborers and two female domestic servants.26 While 1854 marks the end of the period of significance for the house, the Smith family continued to occupy and the property for another 150 years. While additions were constructed and some changes made to the ca. 1811 Federal main block and 1854 Greek Revival wings, these changes were minor and do not impact the integrity of the early sections. On September 14, 1865, Hiram Smith, Jr. died. In his will, written June 4, 1862, he gave all of his property to his wife Mary with the exception of the property in Troy where his son Thomas was living; he gave that to Thomas. Following the death of Mary, he gave his son William H.H. Smith, one-eighth of his property. The remaining seven-eighths went to his son Richard Smith with the condition that: “Richard shall remain upon, take charge of, and conduct the general business of the farm during the life-time of my wife Mary A. Smith, he to receive for his services for so doing one third part of the net profits which may accrue…” He also left money to his remaining children as well as to the Doty children.27 The November 24, 1865 inventory of the estate of Hiram Smith, Jr. is very detailed and makes clear that both additions were extant.28 In 1868, the house appeared on a map as the “Estate of H. Smith.”29(Figure 2) Mary died in 1872. Her obituary in the New York Observer stated that her 22 Ibid., 793 https://books.google.com/books?id=arAfWBsvO1gC&pg=PA789&lpg=PA789&dq=colonel+hiram+smith&source=bl&ots=BtD3A0RPMS&sig=-JCsMiW3Db07ya_FSbse_XEvdJ4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjf5_rStYTKAhUCcD4KHRCfCI8Q6AEIIzAB#v=onepage&q=colonel%20hiram%20smith&f=false 23 Mary L. Smith letter to her nieces and nephews 24 1840 Federal Census 25 1850 Federal Census. 26 1860 Federal Census 27 Morris County Will 7156 N (1891) 28 Morris County Will 4420 N (1865) 29 FW Beers, Atlas of Morris County, New Jersey (New York: FW Beers, AD Ellis and GG Soule, 1868), 14.

DRAFT



loss “is a sore bereavement not alone to her afflicted family but to the community in which she dwelt, for every interest affecting society, moral, social, religious found in her a warm, cordial and active support. She was a remarkable person, few so much gifted, a central figure in our social fabric…”30 Born August 24, 1838, Richard Smith was the 8th child of Hiram and Mary Smith. He was 34 when he inherited the property in 1872 following his mother’s death. Three years previously, on March 8, 1869, he married Emily C. White at Trinity Church, Fredonia, New York; Emily was born in Fredonia on February 14, 1848.31 It is believed that soon after Richard Smith inherited the property, he abandoned the basement kitchen and had the rear kitchen addition constructed; this is part of the family tradition32 but also confirmed by paint analysis in which 19th century paint was found in this wing. In addition, the existence of a fireplace in the wing, which may have vented a stove instead of being an open fire, indicates a 19th rather than 20th date of construction. This addition provided a new kitchen, laundry room and possibly a bathroom. Richard also likely built and then demolished the western one-story frame wing visible in historic photographs. This wing appears to be an office or store and is believed to have been involved in the Smith family milk business. (Figure 3) On April 5, 1876 Emily C. Smith, the first daughter of Richard and Emily Smith, was born followed two years later by another daughter, Marjorie White Smith in 1878.33 In 1880, there were six people living in the Richard Smith House including his wife Emily and their two young girls, Emily (4) and Marjorie (2), Richard’s brother William and his sister Mary (Figure 4). There was no longer any staff living in the house. On April 8, 1889, the Smith family held a public “vendue,” selling household furniture and farming implements. The Parsippany Historical and Preservation Society possesses the inventory of the sale.34 Two years later, on July 29, 1891, Richard Smith died.35 In his will, proved August 10, 1891, Richard Smith wrote “my homestead situate at Troy, Hanover Township, Morris County, New Jersey, containing about 200 acres, wherein I now reside, I would like to have retained unsold, as long as in the opinion of my executors or of the survivor of them, it may be kept advantageously to the interest of my family.”36 The homestead first went to his wife Emily and then upon her death, to his children. Richard Smith’s September 2, 1891 inventory is also within the Parsippany Historical Society’s archives.37 With the death of Richard, Emily Smith became the head of the household. The 1900 Federal Census listed six people living in the Emily Smith House including Emily who was listed as a farmer, her daughter Marjorie, her sister in law Mary, one male servant and one female servant and her daughter.38 At some point before 1904 (but likely after 1891 and the death of Richard Smith), his wife Emily and daughter Emily ran a summer school for girls out of the house. According to a brochure about the school, “During the months of July and August Mrs. Richard Smith and Miss Smith will receive ten or twelve little girls into their country home among the hills of northern

30 Jordan, 791 31 http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=5964975 32 Waddell Smith notes 33 http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=154790124; Emily C. Smith, page 2G 34 Parsippany Historical Society archives, Smith Family 35 Ibid.; http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=5964975 36 Morris County Will 7156N 37 Parsippany Historical and Preservation Society Archives, Smith Family 38 1900 Federal Census

DRAFT

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=154790124



New Jersey. They will offer an opportunity for a healthful, simple life in attractive surroundings, and under intelligent and sympathetic supervision. The homestead is situated at Troy Hills…There will be outdoor athletics, drives, picnic and walks through the woods nearby... For information concerning terms and further details, address Miss Emily C. Smith, Detroit Home and Day School, Detroit, Michigan, and after June 1st, Troy Hills, N.J.” The photo accompanying the brochure proves the western addition had not yet been changed and the one-story frame addition no longer existed (Figures 3 and 8). Beyond this brochure, no additional information was uncovered about the school so it is unclear if it remained only a summer school or was extended beyond. In 1902, Marjorie Smith married William E. Baldwin (born September 25, 1876) of Morristown, NJ.39 Two years later, her mother, Emily Smith died on September 21, 1904.40 Marjorie and her sister inherited the property by their father’s will. In 1909, Emily Smith sold her half of the estate to her sister Marjorie for $5,000.41 Soon thereafter, it is believed that William and Marjorie Baldwin made changes to the house especially the west wing removing the exterior door and interior hallway, raising the second-floor floor height, remodeling the bedrooms of the second floor, raising the roof to add living space in the attic, moving the stairs to the attic and adding porches to the west and rear of the house. At some point, they also added the picture window on the west elevation. By 1910, there were seven people living in the house including his wife Marjorie and their two daughters, his mother Mary Baldwin and three staff: a laborer, a servant and a butler. William Baldwin was listed as having no occupation.42 According to a dated photograph from 1916, the house continued to serve as a summer or private school during this period. In 1920, there were nine people living in the William E. Baldwin House including William and Marjorie’s four daughters. Baldwin’s mother continued to live with them as did Marjorie’s sister, Emily. The staff was two: one cook and one farm laborer. William Baldwin was listed as having a dairy farm.43 Richard Smith Baldwin was born in 1920. In 1930, there were six people living in the Baldwin House including one daughter and one son, his mother and one servant. Baldwin continued to be listed as a farmer.44 On August 20, 1939, Mary Louise Smith died at the age 96. She was the last surviving of the nine children of Hiram and Mary Allen Osborne Smith. Her memories provide many details of the history of the house. By 1940, William and Marjorie Baldwin continued to live in the house with their son Richard who was 19. William was listed as a manager of Farm Service Exchange. This was a commercial outlet in Morristown for farming supplies including equipment, feed and grain. The family also continued to farm. William Baldwin continued as manager of store through 1945.45 In 1946, Richard Baldwin married Mildred A. Hintz;46 their first child, Patricia Baldwin, arrived in 1948. 39 http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=154792365 40 http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=5964975 41 Morris County Deed Book 5, page 1720. 42 1910 Federal Census 43 1920 Federal Census 44 1930 Federal Census 45 1940 Federal Census; http://interactive.ancestry.com/2469/11194149?pid=595255851&backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.com%2f%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fgss%3dangs-g%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dWilliam%2bE.%26gsfn_x%3d0%26gsln%3dBaldwin%26gsln_x%3d0%26mswpn__ftp%3dParsippany%252c%2bMorris%252c%2bNew%2bJersey%252c%2bUSA%26mswpn%3d8918%26mswpn_PInfo%3d8-%257c0%257c1652393%257c0%257c2%257c3244%257c33%257c0%257c2113%257c8918%257c0%257c%26MSAV%3d0%26cp%3d0

DRAFT



With the death of his parents in 1952 (Marjorie White Smith Baldwin died on April 15, 1952 and William E. Baldwin on May 23, 1952 47) Richard S. Baldwin and his wife, Mildred A. Hintz Baldwin inherited the property. Their second daughter, Anita, arrived in 1953. On July 27, 1956, Emily C. Smith died.48 Richard Baldwin did not farm the property and began to subdivide his land for development in 1957. Lots were sold through the end of the 1950s and through the 1960s. In 1965, the two remaining barns were razed when Baldwin sold the neighboring 6-acre tract for the construction of St. Gregory Episcopal Church.49 The 3-car garage was constructed at this time. The Baldwins continued to live in the house and lived there for almost 50 years. Mildred A. Baldwin died on October 6, 2001; Richard died on December 17, 2001. At the time of his death, the remaining 3.5-acre property went to Patricia and Anita Baldwin. Patricia and Anita Baldwin sold the house to the Township of Parsippany-Troy Hills in February 2013, ending the family’s 180-year tenure. The house and property were bought with funds from the Morris County Open Space Trust Fund.50 Criterion C: The Cobb-Smith House The Cobb-Smith House is significant under Criterion C for its Federal and Greek Revival architecture. The original Federal center block was built ca. 1811 for newly married John Joline Cobb, a wealthy, third-generation Troy resident. Its refined architectural detailing attests to Cobb’s wealth and sophistication. In 1854, Hiram Smith, Jr. added the two flanking Greek Revival wings. More utilitarian in design, these Greek Revival wings, likely conceived by Mary Smith, are indicative of the universality of the Greek Revival style in the mid-19th century. While the Smith family and their Baldwin ancestors continued to expand the house owning it until 2013 when descendants sold it to the Township of Parsippany-Troy Hills, it is the early architecture that gives the building its significance. The Federal style arrived in America following the Revolutionary War. Based on the English Adam style, the Federal style first flourished in the cities of the eastern seaboard where wealthy shipping merchants with close contacts in England were its patrons. Noted for its thin, flat and refined ornamentation, especially interior ornamentation, the Federal style emphasized graceful ellipses, attenuated lines and slender proportions. Like the Adams style its English counterpart, the American Federal style embraced the rhythmic forward and backward play of surfaces especially in paneled doors and fireplace mantels. “Supremely rhythmic, wire-fine, and delicately scaled, its attenuated ranks of geometric and natural motifs are drawn in elegant but circumscribed patterns, like the resilient threads of a spiderweb…It is chaste, serene, and controlled.”51 English architecture came to the American colonies through books, engraved illustrations of high style examples. These early books depicted Palladian inspired designs and informed American Georgian architecture. Following the Revolution, such

%26catbucket%3drstp%26pcat%3dROOT_CATEGORY%26h%3d595255851%26db%3dUSDirectories%26indiv%3d1%26ml_rpos%3d6&treeid=&personid=&hintid=&usePUB=true#?imageId=11194149 46 Kenneth L. Purzycki, “History of the Smith-Baldwin House,” Parsippany Historical and Preservation Society archives. 47 http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=22270654; http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=154792365 48 http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=154790124; John W. Jordan, 794 49 “Old Barns will be Razed for Church Construction,” Morris County’s Daily Record (Monday, August 2, 1965), 11. 50 Purzycki report 51 Pierson, 221.

DRAFT

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=154790124



English books as William Pain’s 1774 The Practical Builder guided American Federal architecture, particularly its details—doorways, mantels and cornices. Generally, these books were expensive and owned and therefore used only by the wealthy. However, in 1797, Asher Benjamin published what is considered the first American architectural manual. The Country Builder’s Assistant espoused a native American interpretation of the English styles resulting in examples of the American Federal style. Asher’s follow up book, The American Builder’s Companion was so widely used it ran for six additions from 1806 until 1827. In New Jersey, the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th was a time of great expansion, not only rebuilding after the destruction of the Revolutionary War but also due to increased wealth of the American merchant class. These new houses and public buildings were rarely architecturally high style but instead were vernacular in nature with Federal or Georgian influences, a combination of details influenced from published sources on top of traditional building forms and practices.52 The Cobb-Smith House falls into this category. A high style Federal house was typically symmetrical with gable or hipped roof with a five-bay plan and a center hall. With its side-hall, three-bay plan the Cobb-Smith House continues the local building pattern; most of the local 18th and 19th houses in the area have this same plan. With its gambrel roof, the Cobb-Smith House has more Georgian influences. However, in its detailing, it is pure Federal. On the exterior, this includes the dressed stone foundation with brick window jambs, the arched reeded door casing, the pilasters on plinth blocks, the ornamental keystone, the traceried fanlight, the six-panel door, the multi-light sash and the flush siding which further adds to the understated elegance of this section. As is common with the Federal style, it is on the interior where the building is most quintessentially Federal. Within the hall, the original tinted plaster survives, although painted over. This is a classic Federal treatment found in several other New Jersey resources including the First Presbyterian Church in Orange built in 1812-13,53 the Ceremonial Courtroom of the 1827 Morris County Courthouse in Morristown and the Lane-Voorhees House in Bridgewater, Somerset County which was built ca. 1750-1775 but the plaster likely dates to ca. 1837.54 The open stair with its curve at the second floor, understated tapered newel post and square balusters supporting a circular handrail continue the Federal style. The millwork, six-panel doors and original multi-light sash all are essential Federal features. The fireplace mantels, all four both upstairs and down, are classic Federal elements with recessed and raised planes, ovals and circles, gougework, attenuated urns, narrow columns and exuberant cornices. The first-floor parlor mantels are strikingly similar to the first-floor mantels of Macculloch Hall in Morristown built in 1810 (Morristown Historic District NR 10/30/1973, SR 9/6/1973). In the rear parlor, an 1806 Asher Benjamin design for a fireplace pilaster is directly copied55 (Photo 16). While John and Jane Cobb continued the local traditional building form of a three-bay, side hall plan, their house was noticeably different from its neighbors. The back-parlor fireplace mantel confirms that architectural manuals were consulted for design ideas. This means that in its details, the building is not vernacular but rather is designed in an architectural style. Design motifs like the diamond shape in the rear parlor and the fan-shaped gougework on the mantels are carried through on different features and across rooms. This consciousness of design sets it apart from the other local buildings that existed when

52 Helen Schwartz, The New Jersey House (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1983), 43-53. 53 Stephen Wickes, History of the Oranges in Essex County, New Jersey from 1666 to 1806 (Newark: Ward & Tichenor, 1892), 272. 54 J. Christopher Frey to Margaret Newman, email (November 14, 2016). 55 Asher Benjamin, The American Builder’s Companion or a New System of Architecture Particularly Adapted to the Present Style of Building in the United States of America (Boston: Etheridge and Bliss, 1806), Plate 28.

DRAFT



the house was built. There were early 18th century vernacular buildings in the village of Troy like those at 330 and 400 South Beverwyck Road (Troy Historic District, SHPO opinion of eligibility 3/1/2000). Another nearby house, the Parrott-Smith built at the end of the 18th century at the bend of Beverwyck Road on the east side, appears to have been similar to the Cobb-Smith House in its 3-bay configuration with lateral addition but more heavily designed; the house burned down in the 1970s and the site is now part of the Troy Meadows Wetland.56 Other local existing buildings when the Cobb-Smith House was built include the Benjamin Howell House at 709 South Beverwyck Road (NR 10/19/1978, SR 4/27/1978) which was originally a smaller, mid-18th century vernacular house that was added onto at the end of the century to make it a 5-bay, center hall Georgian. The 18th century Bowers-Livingston-Osborn House at 25 Parsippany Road (NR 6/19/1973, SR 1/29/1973) was also a five-bay, center hall Georgian. Like the Cobb-Smith House, the Bowers-Livingston-Osborn House has a gambrel roof. Besides contemporaneous Parsippany-Troy Hills examples, the 1796 Joseph Tuttle House (NR 10/5/1977, SR 4/5/1976, HABS NJ-469) in Hanover Township, Morris County (which neighbors Parsippany) is similar to the Cobb-Smith House with its 3-bay side hall plan and gambrel roof. The Greek Revival portico also is remarkably similar.57 However, the mantels are much simpler and the Tuttle House does not stand on a raised basement like the Cobb-Smith House. This gives the Cobb-Smith House a grander, more high style feel. In 1833, Hiram and Mary Smith purchased the property. They had a large and extended family living under the roof. After 21 years, they decided to add onto the house to provide the family with additional bedrooms. The resulting flanking wings—built at the same time or within a year or two of each other—were designed in the Greek Revival style, giving the new façade a tripartite composition. While not totally symmetrical when constructed—the west wing was three bays while the east was only two, the west originally had a door, the east did not—the overall effect was balanced. “It did not bother the…builder in the least that the sacred symmetry of the classical temple was thereby destroyed. It is, in fact, this very mutation in form, within the framework of a recognized style, this debasement of an ideal through the simple tools and hands of the local carpenter, that gives to the American Greek Revival its extraordinary diversity and strength.”58 The Greek Revival, the first popular American architectural style that did not draw heavily from English sources, dominated American architecture through the first half of the 19th century. Inspired by ancient Greek architecture and democratic system of government, this new style was seen as the perfect embodiment of the new American republic. With full colonnades, which were copies of Greek temples, the style began with public buildings, like William Strickland’s 1819 Second Bank of the United States in Philadelphia. Benjamin Latrobe was inspired by the east facade of the Erechtheum when he designed the Ionic portico for the Bank of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia in 1798,59 considered by some to be the first Greek Revival building in the United States. Larger estates like Thomas U. Walter’s 1833 adaptation of Nicholas Biddle’s Andalusia in Philadelphia also directly copied the temple form. Locally, today’s Mead Hall in Madison, Morris County, built for William Gibbons in 1833-36 (NR 8/10/1977, SR 12/1/1976), with its massive two-story colonnade, is a fine example of one of these early Greek Revival mansions as is Boisaubin in Chatham Township, Morris County (NR 10/22/1976, SR 6/13/1973). Like the Federal style, the Greek Revival was spread through builders’ manuals including Asher Benjamin who continued to publish through 1839. Stuart and Revett’s 18th century The Antiquities of Athens heavily influenced the later Greek Revival while John

56 Purzycki, 4; https://parsippanyhistoricalsociety.wordpress.com/page/2/ 57 Historic American Building Survey, “Joseph Tuttle House,” HABS NJ-469 https://www.loc.gov/item/nj0712/; Nanci Kostrub, The Tuttle House, National Register of Historic Places Nomination, 1976. http://npgallery.nps.gov/nrhp/AssetDetail?assetID=782dc458-4438-47df-85be-1268ef1d59e4 58 Pierson, 450. 59 Joseph Downs, “The Greek Revival in the United States,” The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin Vol. 2, No. 9 (January 1944), 176.

DRAFT

https://www.loc.gov/item/nj0712/



Haviland published several volumes between 1818 and 1821. Minard Lafever’s Young Builder’s General Instructor was a local New Jersey source, published in Newark in 1829. At the same time, architect/builders like Strickland, Walters and Latrobe were responsible for Greek Revival designs. This was also the case in New Jersey where local craftsmen became well known including Mahlon Fisher in Flemington and Charles Steadman in Princeton. In Morris County, Martin E. Thompson, a New York architect, was responsible for several Greek Revival houses in Morristown including the 1836 Colles House now the Kellogg Club which is included in the Morristown Historic District.60 As the century progressed, the Greek Revival style became less derivative of the Greek temple and more referential with nods to the temple form in more vernacular responses like gable fronts, pediments and pilasters, squared door openings and columned entry porticos. By the 1850s, when the Smith’s commissioned their additions, the style was still commonly being built in New Jersey and like the Cobb-Smith House tended to be heavily vernacular. The clapboard siding, plain window casings, plain door casing with three-light square transom, unadorned cornices and original low-sloping roofs reference the Greek Revival. The pedimented portico on the original section is also an important character defining detail. With its narrow, unfluted Doric columns supporting the denticulated pediment on a heavy cornice, it is a significant Greek Revival addition. On the interior, the woodwork is classically Greek Revival including the heavily shouldered door and window casings with a triple banded profile of the front room in the west section (Room 109). The shoulders mimic ionic capitals of Greek architecture. The casings are supported by plain plinth blocks which recall the column bases of classical Greek architecture. At the windows, the casings frame molded panels, another classic Greek Revival element. The three original wood fireplace mantels in both sections have the refined pared-down Greek Revival styling, framed by simple pilasters with plain capitals ore an eared architrave. The Cobb-Smith additions would skew more to the vernacular as per her letter, Mary Smith herself served as the architect.61

The evolution of the Cobb-Smith House with its wing additions is typical locally where houses tended to grow laterally; houses grew longer with each new phase of construction. This is evident in the Troy Historic District (SHPO Opinion) where most of the houses along South Beverwyck Road have telescoping additions. The Joseph Tuttle House, mentioned above, has a lateral addition and a near duplicative portico; Greek Revival entrances were added in Troy including the Robert Green House at 330 South Beverwyck Road and the Farrand-Ogden House at 260 North Beverwyck Road.62 However, the addition being erected at the same time at the Cobb-Smith House creates an unusually balanced, tripartite form. While the Cobb-Smith may have evolved like many local residences, it also may have been deliberately planned. In his 1833 book, Modern Builder’s Guide Lafever’s depicts a “country residence” that has a larger center volume flanked by lesser symmetrical wings; these houses were built all over the eastern seaboard and New Jersey through the 1850s. In nearby Mendham, Mary Smith could have seen an interpretation of Lafever’s design at Aaron Hudson’s house. These three-part houses may have influenced Mary Smith to create this plan.63

60Robert P. Guter and Janet W. Foster, Building by the Book: Pattern-Book Architecture in New Jersey (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1992), 29-37; Schwartz, 1-33. 61 Mary Smith letter to Eleanor Doty (January 30, 1854). 62 The Parsippany Historical and Preservation Society, 32-39. 63 Daniel D. Reiff, Houses from Books Treatises, Pattern Books, and Catalogs in American Architecture, 1738-1950: A History and Guide (University Park, PA: the Pennsylvania State University Press, 2000), 54-57; Pierson, 447-50; Guter, 31-34.

DRAFT



With its intact original, refined Federal features and harmonious Greek Revival additions, the Cobb-Smith House retains integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. It is a good example of both architectural styles making it locally significant under Criterion C.

DRAFT


National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Cobb-Smith House Parsippany-Troy Hills, Morris County, NJ

Section number 9 Page 1

Bibliography Primary Sources Beers, FW. Atlas of Morris County, New Jersey. New York: FW Beers, AD Ellis and GG Soule, 1868. Federal Census 1830-1940 Morris County Deeds Morris County Wills and Inventories NJ Tax Lists 1772-1822. Hanover Township, Morris County. “Old Barns will be Razed for Church Construction.” Morris County’s Daily Record. Monday, August 2, 1965. Parsippany Historical and Preservation Society Archives Robinson, E. Robinson’s Atlas of Morris County New Jersey. New York: E. Robinson, 1887. Smith Family Papers. Manuscript Group 824. New Jersey Historical Society Secondary Sources Benjamin, Asher. The American Builder’s Companion or a New System of Architecture Particularly Adapted to the Present

Style of Building in the United States of America. Boston: Etheridge and Bliss, 1806. Brewer, Priscilla J. From Fireplace to Cookstove: Technology and the Domestic Ideal in America. Syracuse, New York:

Syracuse University Press, 2000. Condit, Sarah DeHart. “The Cobbs in Troy Hills,” February 9, 1915 Crayon, J. Percy. Rockaway Records of Morris County, New Jersey Families. Rockaway: Rockaway Publishing Co., 1902. Downs, Joseph. “The Greek Revival in the United States.” The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin. Vol. 2, No. 9. January

1944. Guter, Robert P. and Janet W. Foster,.Building by the Book: Pattern-Book Architecture in New Jersey. New Brunswick:

Rutgers University Press, 1992. Jordan, John W. Colonial and Revolutionary Families of Pennsylvania. New York: The Lewis Publishing Company, 1911

DRAFT




Kostrub, Nanci. “The Tuttle House.” National Register of Historic Places Nomination, 1976. Olmert, Michael. “Kitchens: Places Apart” CW Journal. Summer 2007. Parritt, Dr. Joseph House. HABS NJ-562. Parsippany Historical and Preservation Society. Images of America: Parsippany-Troy Hills. Dover: New Hampshire: Arcadia

Publishing, 1997. Parsippany-Troy Hills Vertical Files. North Jersey History and Genealogy Center, Morristown and Morris Township Library Pierson, William H. American Buildings and Their Architects: The Colonial and Neoclassical Style. New York: Oxford

University Press, 1970. Purzycki, Kenneth L. “History of the Smith-Baldwin House.” Parsippany Historical and Preservation Society archives Reiff, Daniel D. Houses from Books Treatises, Pattern Books, and Catalogs in American Architecture, 1738-1950: A History

and Guide. University Park, PA: the Pennsylvania State University Press, 2000. Reinberger, Mark E. and Elizabeth McLean. The Philadelphia County House: Architecture and Landscape in Colonial

America. Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press, 2015. Schwartz, Helen. The New Jersey House. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1983. Shaw, Edward. The Modern Architect, Or, Every Carpenter His Own Master: Embracing Plans, Elevations, Framing, Etc. for

Private Houses, Classic Dwellings, Churches &c. Boston: Dayton and Wentworth, 1854. Smith, Emily C. “Genealogical Chart of Descendants of Richard Smith with material taken from a book written by Philip

Henry Waddell Smith.” 1954. Smith, Oliver B. Domestic Architect: Comprising a Series of Original Designs for Rural and Ornamental Cottages, with Full

and Complete Explanations and Directions to the Builder, Embracing the Elementary Principles of the Grecian and Cottage Styles. New York: Ivison & Phinney, 1854.

Stryker-Rodda, Harriet. Some Early Records of Morris County, New Jersey 1740-1799. New Orleans: Polyanthos, 1975. Tuttle, Joseph House. HABS NJ-469 http://npgallery.nps.gov/nrhp/AssetDetail?assetID=782dc458-4438-47df-85be-1268ef1d59e4 Wickes, Stephen. History of the Oranges in Essex County, New Jersey from 1666 to 1806. Newark: Ward & Tichenor, 1892.

DRAFT

http://npgallery.nps.gov/nrhp/AssetDetail?assetID=782dc458-4438-47df-85be-1268ef1d59e4




Websites http://www.ancestry.com http://www.findagrave.com http://www.geni.com http://victoriandecorating.blogspot.com/2007/02/victorian-home-perhaps-not-quite-what.html

DRAFT

http://www.ancestry.com/

http://www.findagrave.com/

http://www.geni.com/

http://victoriandecorating.blogspot.com/2007/02/victorian-home-perhaps-not-quite-what.html




Boundary Description The nominated property consists of all of Lot 8, Block 240 of the Township of Parsippany-Troy Hills, Morris County, New Jersey. Boundary Justification This is the extent of the 3.5 acre property purchased by the Township of Parsippany-Troy Hill in February 2013 with funds from the Morris County Open Space Trust Fund.

DRAFT



Section number Photos Page 1

Photos Taken by Margaret Newman, November 16, 2016 Photo 1 Looking west along South Beverwyck Road at the Cobb-Smith House Photo 2 South façade of the Cobb-Smith House Photo 3 The original ca. 1811 Federal style house built for John and Jane Cobb Photo 4 The Federal entrance with Greek Revival portico Photo 5 The arched door opening, fanlight and ornamental keystone of the Federal entrance Photo 6 The denticulated cornice of the Greek Revival portico Photo 7 The east elevation of the Cobb-Smith House Photo 8 The north elevation of the Cobb-Smith House Photo 9 The kitchen wing and circulation on the north elevation Photo 10 The west elevation of the Cobb-Smith House Photo 11 The stair hall of the original Federal section, looking south at the front door Photo 12 The bead-and-butt detail of the interior side of the front door, the fanlight and the double molded door and window casings Photo 13 The narrow delicate newel is a Federal feature Photo 14 The parlors of the original section

DRAFT



Section number Photos Page 2

Photo 15 The Federal style mantel of the Front Parlor, Room 102 Photo 16 The Federal style mantel of the Rear Parlor, Room 103 Photo 17 Detail of the double columned pilaster of the mantel. This detail can be found in Asher Benjamin’s 1806 builders manual Photo 18 The diamond medallion of the Rear Parlor matches the diamond motif on the mantel Photo 19 The second floor stairhall, looking north, showing the Federal curve of the stair Photo 20 The mantel of the Front Chamber, Room 203 Photo 21 The mantel of the Rear Chamber, Room 204 Photo 22 Room 106 in the east addition, looking northeast Photo 23 The Greek Revival mantel in Room 106 Photo 24 Room 109 in the west addition, looking northwest Photo 25 The Greek Revival shouldered architrave, window panels, baseboard and plinth blocks of Room 109 Photo 26 The Greek Revival mantel in Room 110 matches that found in Room 106 Photo 27 Room 209 in the west addition, looking northeast Photo 28 Room 007, the ca. 1854 basement kitchen, looking east Photo 29 Room 302 in attic looking east at Rooms 304 and 305

DRAFT

Cobb-Smith House

Garage

Troy Rd

S Bev

erwyc

k Rd

(Coun

ty Rte

637)

Edgewood Ct

B734/ L5

B734/ L2.01

B734/ L4

B734/ L17

B734/ L9

B763/ L13

B763/ L12

B734/ L10

B734/ L8

B734/ L2.15

B734/ L7

B734/ L6

B763/ L14

B763/ L12.01

B733/ L18B734/ L2.16

°LegendNR Boundary

Property Features

Tax ParcelsNJDEP, Historic Preservation OfficeMay 2017

National Register NominationParsippany-Troy Hills Township,Morris County, New Jersey

Boundary and Tax Map0 110 22055

Feet

1:1,500Scale:

Cobb-Smith House 3.02 Acres

DRAFT

ROOM001

ROOM002

ROOM003

BOILERROOM

004

BOILERROOM

005

HISTORICKITCHEN

007

CISTERNACCESS

008A

PANTRY006

CLOSET007A

STORAGE008

PANTRY009

AS

NO

TED

KL

PL-3

EXIS

TIN

G B

ASE

MEN

T PL

AN

BASEMENT PHOTO LOCATION1/8" = 1'-0"

1PL-3

DRA

WN

BY:

DA

TE:

SCA

LE:

82

1 A

LEX

AN

DE

R R

OA

D -

SU

ITE

11

5P

RIN

CE

TO

N,

NE

W J

ER

SE

Y 0

85

40

60

9-4

52

-10

70

- H

MR-

ARC

HIT

ECTS

.CO

M

PARS

IPPA

NY-

TRO

Y H

ILLS

, MO

RRIS

CO

UN

TY, N

EW J

ERSE

YC

OBB

-SM

ITH

HO

USE

10/2

7/15

DRAFT

AutoCAD SHX Text

UP

AutoCAD SHX Text

UP

AutoCAD SHX Text

JOISTS

AutoCAD SHX Text

5" X 10" 16" O.C.

AutoCAD SHX Text

JOISTS

AutoCAD SHX Text

5" X 10" 16" O.C.

AutoCAD SHX Text

JOISTS

AutoCAD SHX Text

5" X 10" 16" O.C.

AutoCAD SHX Text

JOISTS

AutoCAD SHX Text

2" X 10" 16" O.C.

AutoCAD SHX Text

JOISTS

AutoCAD SHX Text

2" X 8" 18" O.C.

AutoCAD SHX Text

VAULTED CISTERN

AutoCAD SHX Text

CISTERN ACCESS HATCH

AutoCAD SHX Text

UP

AutoCAD SHX Text

28

AutoCAD SHX Text

SCALE:

STAIRHALL

101

FRONTPARLOR

102

REARPARLOR

103

LIVING ROOM109

SIDEENTRANCE

111

LAUNDRYROOM

114 PANTRY113

POWDERROOM

115

PASSAGE104

REARHALL

105

CLOSET104A

BATHROOM108

APARTMENTLIVING ROOM

106

KITCHEN107

REARPORCH

116

SIDEPORCH

KITCHEN112

DINING ROOM110

AS

NO

TED

KL

PL-1

EXIS

TIN

G F

IRST

FLO

OR

PLA

N

FIRST FLOOR PHOTO LOCATIONS1/8" = 1'-0"

1PL-1

DRA

WN

BY:

DA

TE:

SCA

LE:

82

1 A

LEX

AN

DE

R R

OA

D -

SU

ITE

11

5P

RIN

CE

TO

N,

NE

W J

ER

SE

Y 0

85

40

60

9-4

52

-10

70

- H

MR-

ARC

HIT

ECTS

.CO

M

PARS

IPPA

NY-

TRO

Y H

ILLS

, MO

RRIS

CO

UN

TY, N

EW J

ERSE

YC

OBB

-SM

ITH

HO

USE

10/2

7/15

DRAFT

AutoCAD SHX Text

UP

AutoCAD SHX Text

DN

AutoCAD SHX Text

UP

AutoCAD SHX Text

DN

AutoCAD SHX Text

DN

AutoCAD SHX Text

DN

AutoCAD SHX Text

UP

AutoCAD SHX Text

UP

AutoCAD SHX Text

DN

AutoCAD SHX Text

DN

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROX LINE OF ORIGINAL PASSAGE

AutoCAD SHX Text

APPROX LOCATION OF ORIGINAL DOOR

AutoCAD SHX Text

11

AutoCAD SHX Text

1

AutoCAD SHX Text

5

AutoCAD SHX Text

6

AutoCAD SHX Text

4

AutoCAD SHX Text

3

AutoCAD SHX Text

2

AutoCAD SHX Text

13

AutoCAD SHX Text

25

AutoCAD SHX Text

24

AutoCAD SHX Text

26

AutoCAD SHX Text

14

AutoCAD SHX Text

15

AutoCAD SHX Text

18

AutoCAD SHX Text

17

AutoCAD SHX Text

16

AutoCAD SHX Text

8

AutoCAD SHX Text

9

AutoCAD SHX Text

7

AutoCAD SHX Text

23

AutoCAD SHX Text

22

AutoCAD SHX Text

10

AutoCAD SHX Text

12

AutoCAD SHX Text

SCALE:

STAIRHALL

201

FRONTCHAMBER

203

REARCHAMBER

204

WESTBEDROOM

209

REARBEDROOM

210

SMALLCHAMBER

202

FRONTBEDROOM

206

STAIRHALL

205 REARBEDROOM

207

BATHROOM211

CLOSET206A

CLOSET207A

CLOSET203A

CLOSET204A

PASSAGE/CLOSET

204B

CLOSET209A

CLOSET201A

PASSAGE/CLOSET

202A

CLOSET201B

CLOSET209B

WESTHALLWAY

208

CLOSET208A

AS

NO

TED

KL

PL-2

EXIS

TIN

G S

ECO

ND

FLO

OR

PLA

N

SECOND FLOOR PHOTO LOCATIONS1/8" = 1'-0"

1PL-2

DRA

WN

BY:

DA

TE:

SCA

LE:

82

1 A

LEX

AN

DE

R R

OA

D -

SU

ITE

11

5P

RIN

CE

TO

N,

NE

W J

ER

SE

Y 0

85

40

60

9-4

52

-10

70

- H

MR-

ARC

HIT

ECTS

.CO

M

PARS

IPPA

NY-

TRO

Y H

ILLS

, MO

RRIS

CO

UN

TY, N

EW J

ERSE

YC

OBB

-SM

ITH

HO

USE

10/2

7/15

DRAFT

AutoCAD SHX Text

DN

AutoCAD SHX Text

DN

AutoCAD SHX Text

DN

AutoCAD SHX Text

UP

AutoCAD SHX Text

DN

AutoCAD SHX Text

ORIGINAL ATTIC STAIR ENCLOSURE

AutoCAD SHX Text

27

AutoCAD SHX Text

19

AutoCAD SHX Text

20

AutoCAD SHX Text

21

AutoCAD SHX Text

SCALE:

STAIRHALL

301 HALL302

STORAGE303

CHAMBER304

CHAMBER305

CHAMBER306

STORAGE307

CHAMBER308

CHAMBER309

AS

NO

TED

KL

PL-4

EXIS

TIN

G T

HIR

D F

LOO

R PL

AN

THIRD FLOOR PHOTO LOCATION1/8" = 1'-0"

1PL-4

DRA

WN

BY:

DA

TE:

SCA

LE:

82

1 A

LEX

AN

DE

R R

OA

D -

SU

ITE

11

5P

RIN

CE

TO

N,

NE

W J

ER

SE

Y 0

85

40

60

9-4

52

-10

70

- H

MR-

ARC

HIT

ECTS

.CO

M

PARS

IPPA

NY-

TRO

Y H

ILLS

, MO

RRIS

CO

UN

TY, N

EW J

ERSE

YC

OBB

-SM

ITH

HO

USE

10/2

7/15

DRAFT

AutoCAD SHX Text

DN

AutoCAD SHX Text

ORIGINAL STAIR OPENING

AutoCAD SHX Text

29

AutoCAD SHX Text

SCALE:

Cobb-Smith House, Parsippany-Troy Hills Township, Morris County Photo 1


historic name other names/site number draft · private x building(s) ... reeded casing and...

Documents